A CBI court sent the hairy and rapacious self-styled godman Gurmeet Singh with close links to the regime to jail on the charge of raping two of his female devotees

In one week three landmark judgments made history, and so did a High Court Judge who refused to recuse himself

Three court judgments made history last week. In a fourth case, in Maharashtra, the State accused a highly respected High Court judge of bias and demanded that a case be removed from his bench. The Chief Justice did it. But the bar associations and public opinion forced that decision to be revoked. And the Government had to eat its words.

But first, the judgments.

The first judgment came on Tuesday. When it set aside the practice of instant triple talaq, saying it violated Articles 14 and 21of the Constitution, everyone was thrilled. Muslim women finally regained their dignity. Instant triple talaq was always known to be a bad idea and even the Muslims knew it. Most men were embarrassed about it. Women hated it. But since the maulvis claimed (incorrectly, as we suspected all along) that it was an intrinsic part of the faith, not many were eager to challenge it. Emboldened by this, some took advantage of it. So you had husbands divorcing wives through speed post, SMS, emails, and even over Skype and WhatsApp ¬ and then disappearing or remarrying. The divorced wife got nothing ¬ apart from social opprobrium.

Slowly the victims gathered the courage to fight back. It helped that many Muslim majority nations across the world (including our neighbours, Pakistan and Bangladesh) have abolished the practice. It also helped that informed Muslims pointed out that nowhere in the Koran is instant triple talaq ever mentioned as a way in which divorce ought to be conducted; nor is it recommended as a religious practice apt for good Muslims. A women’s group and a few victims, mostly poor and unsupported, finally reached the courts and, to everyone’s surprise, it went all the way up to the Supreme Court and won a verdict that has the overwhelming support of women all over India ¬ and no, it did not offend the Muslim community at large.

Stopping instant triple talaq, everyone felt, was a step in the right direction. As indeed banning sati was in 1829.

The next judgment came on Wednesday. It was even more important because it involved not just women of one community. It involved us all. A nine-member Supreme Court bench, in its infinite wisdom, restored to every Indian the right to privacy ¬ as a fundamental right intrinsic to our life and liberty enshrined in Article 21and all the Government’s men and their fancy arguments could not persuade a single judge among those nine to see it otherwise. Many have called it one of the finest judgments ever, where the case for privacy has been brilliantly argued and upheld. 70 years after Independence, when our privacy was under the biggest threat, the court reaffirmed that whatever excuse the Government may offer, they cannot impinge upon our private space.

We cannot have mobs invade our homes, raid our larders, lynch people. In fact, the State should not be deciding what we eat, what we read, the language we speak, what we watch in the movies, what we wear to school or college, how we worship, who we fall in love with, who we marry.

Hopefully, some recent decisions will now come under scrutiny and the Orwellian world being built around the premise of the Aadhar card, the Nandan Nilekani-authored script for mass surveillance, will be subjected to review.

The third judgment was on Friday. By a CBI court that sent a hairy and rapacious self-styled godman with close links to the regime to jail on the charge of raping two of his female devotees.

The courage of those women who pursued justice in the face of intimidation, and the grit of a local journalist who was later murdered for breaking the story, finally paid off when Judge Jagdeep Singh sent the accused god-man, Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh to jail to await his punishment. Predictably, and right under the nose of an indolent Government, his private army went on a rampage. Many were killed; hundreds, wounded. Enraged public opinion finally forced the State to call in the army. The rapist is now behind bars, sentenced to 20 years rigorous imprisonment and the mayhem caused will have to be paid for by his Dera, the judge has ordered.

The judgment has been widely acclaimed. Now demands have been raised that two other god-men incarcerated for separate crimes be swiftly tried. It will hopefully rid us of a pernicious bunch of criminals masquerading as men of god. Their power comes from political patronage.

And now: the footnote. The Maharashtra Government went to the High Court last week, demanding the noise pollution cases being heard by Justice Abhay Oka, one of our most upright judges, be taken away from him because he was biased. Biased? Biased against what? Noise pollution? Is that a bad thing to be? The State proudly proclaimed it had amended the rules and shut down all silent zones in the city. Now why would any self-respecting Government do that?

Mumbai is one of the top cities in the world with severe noise pollution.

Fortunately, the bar associations went up in arms. So did the media, the public. So strong was the resistance that quietly on Monday, the cases were returned to Justice Oka. The Government was forced to apologise. The judge now wants the apology in the form of a signed affidavit. Yet another victory for public opinion.

Recent Messages ()

Please rate before posting your Review

OR PROCEED WITHOUT REGISTRATION

Share on Twitter

SIGN IN WITH

Refrain from posting comments that are obscene, defamatory or inflammatory, and do not indulge in personal attacks, name calling or inciting hatred against any community. Help us delete comments that do not follow these guidelines by marking them offensive. Let's work together to keep the conversation civil.